SHRI L. NACHIAPPAN,KARAIKUDI vs. ITO, WARD-2, KARAIKUDI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2896/CHNY/2019Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 March 2022AY 2012-133 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had passed an ex-parte and non-speaking order. Therefore, the matter was restored back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication and a speaking order.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal arose from an order of the CIT(A) which confirmed the assessment order. The assessee argued that the CIT(A)'s order was non-speaking and lacked individual findings, failing to adjudicate the eligibility for exemption under Section 10(37).

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) passed a speaking order and properly adjudicated the assessee's claim for exemption. Whether the CIT(A) properly considered the documentary evidence submitted by the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 10(37),Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGHAND Dr. M.L. MEENA

Hearing: 09.03.2022Pronounced: 10.03.2022

आदेश /O R D E R PER BENCH:

1.

This appeal by the assessee is arising out of the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Madurai in IA No.0016/2015-16 dated 20.08.2019 for the assessment year 2012-13. The assessment was framed by the ITO, Ward -2, Karikudi for the assessment year 2012-13 u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter ‘the Act’) vide order dated 31.03.2015.

2 2. At the outset, the ld.counsel for the assessee took us through Ground No.1.2 which reads as under:-

“1.2 The order of CIT(A) is a non-speaking order and is merely a reiteration of the Assessment Order with no individual findings and application of mind.”

3.

The ld.counsel for the assessee took us through the findings of CIT(A) in para 6 which reads as under:-

“6. I have considered the written submission made by the authorized representative and the assessment order. The appellant has not produced any documentary either before Assessing Officer or before me that the lands in question were used for agricultural activity during two years preceding the date of acquisition. In my considered view, the appellant does not fulfill the conditions laid down u/s. 10(37) of the Income Tax Act and hence is found not to be eligible for exemption for the compensation receipts in respect of the compulsory acquisition of land made by NHAI. Hence, no interference is called for in the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer. The grounds of appeal are not maintainable.

3.1 The ld.counsel for the assessee stated that the CIT(A) simpliciter reproduced the assessment order in para 5, but has not adjudicated the issue whether the assessee is eligible for exemption for the compensation receipts in regard to compulsory acquisition of land by National Highways Authority of India. The ld.counsel stated that entire details i.e., acquisition order, land records of revenue officer i.e., land acquisition officer, approvals and survey conducted by NHAI are filed before AO as well as CIT(A). The AO has completely discussed but reached to a wrong conclusion. He stated that CIT(A) has not at all

3 adjudicated the issue and simpliciter confirmed the action of AO. Hence, he requested that the matter may be restored back to the file of CIT(A). The ld.Senior DR could not controvert the arguments made by the ld.counsel for the assessee.

4.

After hearing ld. Counsel for the assessee as well as ld. Senior DR, we noted that the CIT(A) has passed ex-parte order and that to a non-speaking order. Hence, we restore the matter back to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication and for passing a speaking order. This issue of assessee’s appeal is set aside to the file of CIT(A) and allowed for statistical purposes.

5.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the court on 10th March, 2022 at Chennai.

More judgments on Section 10(37)

All 558 judgments and leading authorities on Section 10(37) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →